User talk:JMDGamotia

February 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Power, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Brutality. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Brutality was changed by JMDGamotia (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2017-02-22T05:30:08+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Brutality, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Crowbar has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Crowbar was changed by JMDGamotia (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2017-03-01T13:50:29+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:50, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitions on DAB pages[edit]

Please stop adding definitions to DAB pages. They do not belong, there is a link to Wikitionary that holds the definitions and if someone wants the definition they can click the link. ~ GB fan 12:31, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That[edit]

The word you added did not change the meaning in any way.

The word that you added did not change the meaning in any way.[1] - SummerPhD^v2.0 14:09, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:Daniel Bryan YES Movement Sticker.jpeg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Daniel Bryan YES Movement Sticker.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:YESMovement.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:YESMovement.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:YESMovement.jpeg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:YESMovement.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dab page edits[edit]

Hi JMDGamotia, I just cleaned up Cascade and stumbled across your edit [2] which directly links to another dab Collisional cascading which is incorrect per WP:INTDAB. Collisional cascading was missing a redirect (now created) to use for that. We never pipe on dabs, so "Collisional cascading (disambiguation)" piping (which attempts to fix something which should be fixed elsewhere) seems to not understand that it's the direct link that's important. I have concerns that you're making many dab page edits, and there's a high error rate per WP:MOSDAB e.g. Mortar. Can you please familiarise yourself with the guide before making more dab edits. Widefox; talk 22:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC) Please can you discuss this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#User:JMDGamotia, regards Widefox; talk 22:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page Angeline. However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:

Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry
- Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
Do not insert external links or references

and other dabs - please discuss at dab project Widefox; talk 12:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. please discuss this disruption at the dab project Widefox; talk 12:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mortar. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Widefox; talk 13:24, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello?[edit]

Can you confirm you're getting this message? Widefox; talk 16:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No

If you aren't going to talk to me, please can you discuss here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#User:JMDGamotia ? Widefox; talk 15:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, JMDGamotia. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018[edit]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shillelagh - DAB[edit]

Hello. There are two weapons called "Shillelagh". The Shillelagh missile (a weapon). And the Shillelagh club (a weapon). I do not know what prompted your decision to move the latter to a title which causes confusion with the former. But I do not see it as an improvement. If anything, in my view, what we now have is a greater DAB issue. Than we had before. Unless there is a specific or strong rationale for the change, then I believe it should be reverted. At least pending a discussion. On how to address the additional DAB issues that may precipitate. Guliolopez (talk) 12:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries and disambiguation (dab)[edit]

Stuff like this piece I reverted you on is not rewording. You need to use accurate edit summaries. And a disambiguation note is not needed for articles that are already disambiguated. But I see that you have been warned times before on your talk page about your disambiguation edits. You need to listen, or face being WP:Blocked. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed move and inaccurate edit summaries[edit]

Let me concur with what Flyer22 Reborn said above. Your edit summaries are very misleading and you need to learn how to disambiguate properly. Please read the relevant policies and don't just ignore these messages from other uses. Also, I just reverted a move you made to Toto (band) that was unnecessary and undiscussed. Please discuss on the talk page if you disagree. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 08:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Laser brain (talk) 14:08, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This block is only indefinite until you show you are willing and able to communicate with fellow editors. Your page is full of requests to communicate and you are still making the same mistakes without any discussion at all. Your only edit to a talk page is to say "no" when someone asked if you were getting their message. This block can be lifted by any administrator once you start communicating about your edits. --Laser brain (talk) 14:09, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JMDGamotia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Being ready to edit without using disruptive edits

Decline reason:

This does not address the concerns raised. Yamla (talk) 14:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JMDGamotia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Getting ready to edit any article without suffering disruptive edits Juan Miguel (talk) 09:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You still don't address the reason for your block or explain what you will do on Wikipedia if unblocked. As such, I am declining this request. If you continue to make unblock requests without doing those things, your ability to edit this page can be revoked. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JMDGamotia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just ending the block Juan Miguel (talk) 09:33, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is a collaborative project; you must be able to communicate coherently with other editors. Your three unblock requests fail to demonstrate this, suggesting insufficient proficiency in written English. Therefore your ability to make further appeals has been withdrawn. MER-C 09:51, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

JMDGamotia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21253 was submitted on Apr 18, 2018 13:54:40. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 13:54, 18 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

JMDGamotia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21379 was submitted on Apr 30, 2018 09:34:34. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 09:34, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]